Red-Robbo Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Not yet, but the policy of the new Ukrainian government is to join NATO. Putin was happy for the Ukraine to remain neutral, but not happy to have NATO troops on the Russian border. So he has a veto on what people in other countries decide to do now, does he? Should we ask him if he wants the Warsaw Pact back and redivide Germany? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipdawg Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Not yet, but the policy of the new Ukrainian government is to join NATO. Putin was happy for the Ukraine to remain neutral, but not happy to have NATO troops on the Russian border. I was unaware that Putin had a say in what Ukraine does with it's own territory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 I was unaware that Putin had a say in what Ukraine does with it's own territory OK, but dues the USA have any say as to what Cuba does with its territory? I seem to recall that we were minutes away from WWIII over just that issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 So he has a veto on what people in other countries decide to do now, does he? Should we ask him if he wants the Warsaw Pact back and redivide Germany? The USA seems to have a veto over what Cuba decides to do... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 The USA seems to have a veto over what Cuba decides to do... Not really. Relationships are naturalised now and the trade embargo has been lifted. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-30868845 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipdawg Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 OK, but dues the USA have any say as to what Cuba does with its territory? I seem to recall that we were minutes away from WWIII over just that issue. Well, no- though are you saying you would have wanted the USSR to have nuclear weapons a couple of hundred miles from the US? Though the circumstances and era was very different and I don't think the threat of conflict from the Ukraine being able to sell coal in Germany is quite as great as nuclear weapons in Cuba pointing at Washington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Well, no- though are you saying you would have wanted the USSR to have nuclear weapons a couple of hundred miles from the US? Though the circumstances and era was very different and I don't think the threat of conflict from the Ukraine being able to sell coal in Germany is quite as great as nuclear weapons in Cuba pointing at Washington Of course not. That's why Kennedy was right to stop the weapons reaching Cuba. The deal he got, maybe to save Kruschev's face, was to withdraw nuclear weapons from Turkey, bordering on the USSR. However, the threat of NATO nuclear weapons in Ukraine, not a couple of hundred miles from Russia but on its border, is just as great. This is what worries Putin. You may think it's paranoid, but given recent US history, I reckon it's all too likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Not really. Relationships are naturalised now and the trade embargo has been lifted. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-30868845 Not what I'm talking about, and you know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Not what I'm talking about, and you know it. The Cuban missile crisis was 1962, Aiz. We're talking about how superpowers behave in 2015. The Cold War is supposed to be over. Putin needs to understand that his beloved USSR isn't coming back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 The Cuban missile crisis was 1962, Aiz. We're talking about how superpowers behave in 2015. The Cold War is supposed to be over. Putin needs to understand that his beloved USSR isn't coming back. Tell that to Obama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Seriously, people. As an exercise, try looking at US policy from the Russian viewpoint. It looks very different from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipdawg Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Of course not. That's why Kennedy was right to stop the weapons reaching Cuba. The deal he got, maybe to save Kruschev's face, was to withdraw nuclear weapons from Turkey, bordering on the USSR. However, the threat of NATO nuclear weapons in Ukraine, not a couple of hundred miles from Russia but on its border, is just as great. This is what worries Putin. You may think it's paranoid, but given recent US history, I reckon it's all too likely.NATO doesn't have nuclear weapons, some of its members do and no member nation has indicated they have any desire to site nuclear weapons there. In fact, I'm pretty sure that the terms of the UN non-proliferation treaty means that no NATO country could site nuclear weapons in Ukraine because that would be, you know, proliferation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted February 20, 2015 Report Share Posted February 20, 2015 Interesting fact about the cuban missile crisis. The reason the Russian plan was uncovered was because their operating procedure for the missle transit did not include covering them up. The engineers followed the proceedure the letter but unfortunately for them, no one thought to question why certain aspects weren't being hidden. They've clearly not learnt their lesson, as we've seen tons of evidence of their armour moving across the border with Ukraine, including highly sophisticated anti air systems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Hunt-Hertz Posted February 21, 2015 Report Share Posted February 21, 2015 My dads bigger than your dad, ruskies are riding rough shod over the Ukraine; a line in the sand must be drawn in Europe; counties must not be allowed to be taken by force only the ballot box. We all need to make a stand for what we believe in, freedom of choice I reckon Somerset and Gloucestershire should take Wiltshire with a decisive pincer movement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welcome To The Jungle Posted February 21, 2015 Report Share Posted February 21, 2015 I reckon Somerset and Gloucestershire should take Wiltshire with a decisive pincer movement. With dorset providing covering artillery fire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted February 21, 2015 Report Share Posted February 21, 2015 Tell that to Obama. Where are the out-of-uniform American soldiers driving tanks and self-propelled guns over someone else's border? Of course Ukraine wants to join NATO. It's been attacked twice by a more powerful neighbour. You really must stop watching Russia Today, mate. You know it's produced by the propaganda unit of what used to be called the KGB. It has no independent credibility whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucksred Posted February 21, 2015 Report Share Posted February 21, 2015 I think you may find that, if there is a war (which God forbid), it will be orchestrated from Washington. Would you be paranoid about Russian troops stationed in Scotland? If Scotland elected a government that wanted to become a member of CFS then you'd have to expect it. The only Russian land border there are Nato ground forces on is Poland-Kalingrad. And given Russia's historic behaviour towards the Poles, that is hardly surprising. There are Nato planes in the Baltic Republics, but the Nato ground forces there are those of the republics themselves. And tell me, do you think Moscow feels threatened by Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania or is it vice versa? I love the continued anti American stuff still flying round the West., its ****** hysterical. A few facts. 1. the only country which gained more territory after WW2 was the USSR (and the RUSSIANS dominated said SSR) To whit, Pechenga/Petsamo & Vipuuri/Viborg oblasts from Finland, Koenigsburg & Tilsit besirks from Germany, Bessarbia & Bukovina from Romania, and Ruthenia from the then Czechoslovakia, now Slovakia , The South of Sakhalin from Japan, not to mention the Baltic States which they got in a deal with the Nazis in 1940. Oh yeah and Polands borders were move Westward pretty substantially to include the former Austro Hungarian parts (THey already had regained the Russian areas in 1939/40 from the same deal from the Nazis) and the Poles were given Southern E Prussia (Elbing, Johannisburg, Allenstein & Suwalki bezirks) Pomerania, E Brandenburg, Upper & Lower Silesia a much smaller area, which had been thouroughly destroyed/looted by the said Russians as part of the "Great Patriotic War". Very few of the areas annexed except part of Bukovina had many Russians there. By the time the gulags had been filled with dissidents ie patriots, the Russians moved large numbers of settlers in just like the Nazis did. When the territories concerned had a chance they voted for freedom. Ukraine was annexed from Poland in one of the three partitions Poland endured by Russians, Austrians and latterly Prussian/Germans, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan were annexed by the Tsarist rusian empires in the 18th/19th centuries. The theme of this is the Russians are and were doing precisely what the Nazis did, and noone says anything. Millions of Ukranians died in the twenties/thirties in the collectivisation/Russification of the region. Given this history and Russias extreme nationalist fringes of which Putin is an enthusiastic part, its hardly a surprise the Western fringes of its "Empire" want out...and which is why Russia has "Settled" these areas. Now noone gives a **** about German territory, cos they started the war and there wasnt/isnt a great deal of sympathy towards them, some 10 million Germans were displaced (Not including the roughly 2 million killed in the fighting for their territories) the displacement of a similar number of Poles, Romanians, Balts, Finns is not exactly a great idea. First Georgia, then Ukraine have been destabilised and dismembered. The next areas involved in the Russian game are Latvia & Estonia, which were heavily settled, due to both countries hostility during and after WW2. They are now free, democratic members of the EU, and more importantly members and contributing members of NATO, and Transnistria (Part of Moldova, and solidly Romanian speaking..and yep ypuve guessed it also EU & NATO members. The parallels with the Nazi annexation of the Sudetenland and ehtnic German area of Czechoslovakia in 1938 are striking. Peace in our time and all that shit. Where did the Nazis go next Poland. The UK and France garanteed Polands territorial integrity and we all know what happened next. When they invaded Poland France backpedalled like **** and we abandoned Poland, leading directly to the disasters of 1940, & 41. Yet again France leads the appeasers and this time Germany is also helping. I suspect its a matter of time before Putin stirs it up in Estonia & Latvia to see what NATO will do...the answer **** all, European countries depended on the US for protection from the Russian threat. The E Europeans dont want Ivan back, but hes gonna be disappointed, neither the EU of NATO will do a damn thing...wonder where he and the Russians will stop. they LOATHE Poland & Germany and would love to break both, and the smaller nations will collapse. Now our old pals the Yanks tried in their usual naive initially then cynically attempts to keep communist sympathisers out of their back yard, but at no point did the Land of the Free ever colonise any of the countries concerned....big big difference. Russia in all its forms has been a menace to Eastern Europe including Germany & Austria/Hungary for centuries and thats the big difference. People in Eastern Europe including Ukraine and the Caucasian states do NOT want to live under Russian (or German in previous times). Uncle Ivasn dont like that much. Come to think of it Turkey doesnt particularly want it either. If we want to stop it without war, we need to ensure we have the military capability to do it. The US is now focussed on the far East where its Allies will spend to defend, unlike Europe which has constantly sniped at the Yanks (Vietnam, sundry middle east wars) but ignored Soviet aggression (Czechoslovakia, Poland, East Germany, Hungary) while at the same time hiding behind the Yanks in Central Europe. The EU has states like France & the UK who do use force if needed, along with four declared Neutral countries (Finland, Sweden, Austria & Eire) the biggest country which is pacifist (Germany), three sympathetic countries to Russia (Greece, Slovakia & Cyprus) and the rest are small fighters (Denmark, holland, the Baltic states) or skint who will not pull their weight for various reasons either financial (Eastern Bloc skint, or Western bankrupt) or having governments who will not spend on defence/security. Putins Russia will keep pushing until hes forced to stop. Pissing about will not help. Sanctions backed up with sufficient military resources and the will to use them will help. Doing what were doing will result in millions of people going behind a new iron curtain. Russias bloody history shows that all to often Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted February 22, 2015 Report Share Posted February 22, 2015 Where are the out-of-uniform American soldiers driving tanks and self-propelled guns over someone else's border? Of course Ukraine wants to join NATO. It's been attacked twice by a more powerful neighbour. You really must stop watching Russia Today, mate. You know it's produced by the propaganda unit of what used to be called the KGB. It has no independent credibility whatsoever. Never seen it. Where does it have its being? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted February 22, 2015 Report Share Posted February 22, 2015 Never seen it. Where does it have its being? Good for you. Shamefully we allow it a presence on Freeview. Might as well allow Islamic State TV to broadcast in the UK in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted February 22, 2015 Report Share Posted February 22, 2015 RT is amazing. Followed by Fox news. Both are my guilty pleasure when no one's home. My favourite RT moment was when they showed burnt out Russian tanks, claiming that they were Georgian. Fox and its news piece on "lesbian gangs" sweeping through Washington will never be topped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welcome To The Jungle Posted February 22, 2015 Report Share Posted February 22, 2015 RT is amazing. Followed by Fox news. Both are my guilty pleasure when no one's home. My favourite RT moment was when they showed burnt out Russian tanks, claiming that they were Georgian. Fox and its news piece on "lesbian gangs" sweeping through Washington will never be topped. I love watching both. Two of my favourite comedies. It is organisations like RT and Fox that make me so happy that we have, for all its flaws, the BBC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted February 22, 2015 Report Share Posted February 22, 2015 I love watching both. Two of my favourite comedies. It is organisations like RT and Fox that make me so happy that we have, for all its flaws, the BBC. Aye. As much as I detest the license fee we're very lucky to have an almost unbiased national news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted February 22, 2015 Report Share Posted February 22, 2015 Good for you. Shamefully we allow it a presence on Freeview. Might as well allow Islamic State TV to broadcast in the UK in my opinion. It's available on Twitter and Facebook, though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucksred Posted February 23, 2015 Report Share Posted February 23, 2015 Aye. As much as I detest the license fee we're very lucky to have an almost unbiased national news. Aint that the truth, although I suspect it would be different if we only had the BBC for news... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.